
This is a placeholder text
Group text
by hexe on 02 December 2012 - 01:12
Minicus, there are only three reasons why you won't find a dog listed in the OFA database: either the dog did not receive a passing rating [the owner has to authorize the publication of failing results], the dog's x-rays were never submitted to OFA for evaluation, or the films were only recently submitted and the results haven't been added to the website database yet. It can take a month or more for the results, if passing, to show up on the website, depending upon when the films were submitted and rated, in relation to when the website was last updated.
As for your question about elbows, while just about everybody who knows what a GSD is knows that hips can be a problem and there's certification that can be obtained for them, many still don't know about elbow issues--unfortunately, that does include people who are breeding GSDs--and therefore don't have them done, or feel that they've never had a dog with a bad elbow, so the problem isn't in their lines. [They are wrong about the last part of that sentence, BTW.] So again, either the films were never submitted to OFA, or the dog's elbows failed, if you're not seeing elbow ratings for dogs that do show hip ratings.
As for your question about elbows, while just about everybody who knows what a GSD is knows that hips can be a problem and there's certification that can be obtained for them, many still don't know about elbow issues--unfortunately, that does include people who are breeding GSDs--and therefore don't have them done, or feel that they've never had a dog with a bad elbow, so the problem isn't in their lines. [They are wrong about the last part of that sentence, BTW.] So again, either the films were never submitted to OFA, or the dog's elbows failed, if you're not seeing elbow ratings for dogs that do show hip ratings.
by Blitzen on 02 December 2012 - 03:12
The ASL breeders have been using OFA a lot longer than most of the German breeders. As time passes, if more with German breeders use the OFA scheme, the information will be more complete.
I have never been able to find an open database for SV numbers, just the ZW ratings. I assume if a dog has a ZW number that means his hips have been evaluated by the SV.?If no ZW, no hip evaluation. Is that correct? Is there a way to confirm the SV hip ratings?
I have never been able to find an open database for SV numbers, just the ZW ratings. I assume if a dog has a ZW number that means his hips have been evaluated by the SV.?If no ZW, no hip evaluation. Is that correct? Is there a way to confirm the SV hip ratings?

by Minicus on 02 December 2012 - 04:12
Hexe . Kinda thought so thankyou. Blitzen I believe many dogs on SV website are not listed you need to get CD not sure though but this is what I got from SV website
"The search continues for performance reasons on a database of about 220,000 registered dogs with the HD values normal, almost normal, and still allowed "a" foreign. Dogs without HD-finding are not in the database.
Many more dogs (about 560,000) and additional information on descendants, ascendants, Littermates, HD-/ED-Wert visit our SV Genetics CD. This recognized breeding program is published quarterly and is available only through our SV-order service.
In the search of partial terms, please use * as a wildcard
"The search continues for performance reasons on a database of about 220,000 registered dogs with the HD values normal, almost normal, and still allowed "a" foreign. Dogs without HD-finding are not in the database.
Many more dogs (about 560,000) and additional information on descendants, ascendants, Littermates, HD-/ED-Wert visit our SV Genetics CD. This recognized breeding program is published quarterly and is available only through our SV-order service.
In the search of partial terms, please use * as a wildcard

by Prager on 02 December 2012 - 04:12
Hexe first of all
1.to demand yes or no answers to questions is pretty arrogant and one of more primitive sophistries or so called fallacies of loaded question. I am not going to play such trap game here . Thus no yes /no answers from me here.Are you still beating your wife : Yes / No? Such demand is embarrassing. A "loaded question" is a dangerous but easy to see. Yes no demading questions is one of such loaded questions. It is dishonest to ask such questions. The question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Yes / no. If you are unmarried, or have never beaten your wife, then the question is loaded.
Same asking me hypothetical questions below.
I leave that to politicians.
2. I do not understand why are you asking me these questions. I have already said what I do in such instances quite clearly all over this thread.
3, I would like to remind you that you have absolutely no authority to ask me or anybody such questions.
However just to humor the public I will answer them but my way.
Even so all those questions are hypothetical and potential set ups. But I am sucker for good discussion.
Question 1: Hans, if you have the dog x-rayed and after viewing it with your vet, you conclude the dog's hips are sound and normal, but when you send the films to OFA, they return a rating of "Dysplastic, Mild", will you elect to disregard the OFA rating in favor of the opinion of you and your vet, and use that dog for breeding purposes?
This is a hypothetical question which depends on the x ray. I may look again on the x ray and see error of my reading which I have missed or if I am convinced that x ray had been read poorly then I my pursue other avenue. Like let radiologist readit again for me . However I do not breed questionable dog until I am 100% sure that they are no problem hips.
When the hips are done by me then I can say if they are dysplastic or not. If they are dysplastic then I will not breed such dog. And I do not bred dogs on the fringes of what ever scale is used scale anyway thus this would be no issue. Ever. However for example my warranty says that the OFA is final authority in any dispute. However before such x rays are send to OFA for evaluation then such x rays must be first approved by me for proper positioning. As I have already said here before and I say again. In such hypothetical case I would discuss this with people who are world class experts in the field and to whom I trust. And I would not breed the dog untill I am sure of what is going on with the dog < OFA reading or my reading. But this is strictly hypothetical question and I do not have opinion what I would hypothetically do about hypothetical x ray. I would have to see how much the OFA or How much I have screw up . Then I would make the decision on what I would do.
Question 2: If you have the dog x-rayed as in the above question, and again you and your vet conclude the dog's hips are sound and normal, but the OFA rating comes back as "Borderline", would you ever elect to disregard the OFA rating in favor of the opinion of you and your vet, and go on to use that dog for breeding purposes?
Same answer as above . How do you answer hypothetical question like that? It depends on the x rays. Show me such x rays and I'll tell you what I would do. However I would not breed such dog until I get second, third or 10th opinion Then I would go with the majority of these experts opinions. But this is not an issue because i do not breed on such fringes of any particular scale.
However
If you are asking me if I would breed borderline per se according to OFA then here is my answer.
I respect the European registry for evaluation. Thus if the dogs is for example fast normal and noch zugelassen which are consecutively parallel with OFA borderline and mild in that order I would remotely and unlikely consider to breed them. However I have never done that since I usually do not breed German dogs. I may consider or have breed equivalent to fast normal which is an OFA borderline but do not remember that I have ever done that. Before people get into screeming fit here I would like to remind them ( as I beleive Gustav did) that A normal, A1,2,3, B1 , B2 B, fast normal and Noch zugelassen and on and on and aon are acceptable grades in SV and other registries.Thus for example in Germany they breed according to OFA grades borderline and mild and SV thinks it is just peachy - ducky.
To say that, I will clarify what is the a problem here on PDB. If you read info on PDB you must know what is, or was, going on as far as hips grading goes. I explain. PDB was set up in the way ( it is corrected now) that there was no system for Czech evaluation( 0/0, 1/1, 1/2, 2/2, 2/3, 3/3, 3/4, 4/4) thus for example many people ascribed eroniously 1/1 as equal to "fast normal". But actually it should have been A2 since fast normal would be more like 2/2 or even 3/3. Also some ascribed to 2/2 or 1/2 to Noch zugelassen where 2/2 ( or 1/2) is actually B1 and noch zugelassen is C or 3/3 or mild. There is overlaping between the grades and grades are open to different interpretaion in different countries, there are different definitions of non HD hips and some scales are abandoned but use same letters as current scales.Thus this ascribing leads to general confusion and incorrect ascribing to comparative grades of different registries. Another problem with all this is that the system and it's nomenclature changes all the time in many coutries.
I would say that I would breed with no hesitation OFA excellent , or good and probably not fair or in Czech nomenclature I would breed and have bred 0/0 or 1/1 in first generation. I may have bred 2/2 in first generation, but I do not remember that and I have and I would not do it these days in first generation or I may consider to do it only in extreme cases. I would breed noch cubelassen present in 3 generartion and I would not breed is if it is in red line with other what I call "funky" hips. " Funky hips for my purposes are less then A-normal or A 2 or OFA good or equivalent from different scales are in my usage funky hips.
Remember this is all fuzzy subject to interpretation in dofferent coutris and diferrent definition there too. There is no exact coparison amongst these scales but they are fluently pasing form one to another.
Study this:
http://www.offa.org/hd_grades.html
Question 3: In either instance above, do you have new x-rays done of the same dog, and submit them as such to OFA?
I may and I may not.
Same answer again . How do you answer hypothetical question like that? It depends on the x rays. Show me such x rays and I'll tell you what I would do. Did I relaize that I screwed up or do I think that they screwed up? Is the positioning off and I missed it? Is the film exposed properly or not and I missed it? I can go on and on. The answer is I may or may not. Thus it depends on the x rays.
I have seen the dog resend to OFA and even so both positioning were same or well done the grade came different second time. Thus where am I in such hypothetical or real case for that matter? Nowhere. Just spending good money after bad. I have 2 different readings of 2 good x rays and still would not know squat. What would be the hypothetical point of that?
I have recommended to people to do so if their dog's hips were not positioned properly. If that was done then often the evaluation went grade or even 2 up.
Question 4: In either instance above, do you have new x-rays done of the same dog, and submit them as such to the SV [via USCA or WDA], or some other certification entity that is recognized by internationally by FCI member registries?
Again hypothetical on what I would do if. Show me the x rays and I'll tell you what I would do. However if ( hypothetically ) I would think that OFA is definitely wrong then
I would consult that with people whom I trust and who read for different registries.If they would agree with me I may send it if they would not agree with me then I would not resend it. I have recommended this with elbows to some people since I am not as good at reading elbows.
Question 5: In either instance above, do you have new x-rays done of the same dog, and submit them as such privately to a board-certified radiologist?
If hypothetically I would think that OFA is making mistake then Yes I would. If I would see error of my ways then I would not.
Prager Hans
by Blitzen on 02 December 2012 - 05:12
Hans, I've been meaning to ask - do you know Matt Devaney?
by hexe on 02 December 2012 - 05:12
Hans, thank you for your replies. Believe it or not, you actually DID answer the yes or no that needed to be said, in this simple sentence:
"However for example my warranty says that the OFA is final authority in any dispute."
Generally speaking, I don't care for the "yes or no, no elaboration" line of questioning, either; if you know nothing else about me, I think it's pretty clear I like to expand on an answer. But frankly, it seemed like it was the only way to get you annoyed enough to FINALLY verbalize what you have above. And like it or not, answering the questions I put to you as you did should dispel allegations or insinuations that you would use a dysplastic dog as a breeding animal--so really, I helped YOU out...but you don't have to thank me.
Seriously, though, I do appreciate that you responded despite your displeasure at having questions that were somewhat closed-end asked. I dispute your comparison of them to the 'Did you stop beating your wife' type of question, however, because I worked hard to make sure these questions were NOT constructed in such a way that regardless of whether you answered yes or no, the result was still the same. And I also disagree your rebuke of arrogance on my part--I was just seeking to piss you off enough that you'd stop creating openings big enough to drive a semi through if someone wanted to spin your replies to suit their lack of integrity.
"However for example my warranty says that the OFA is final authority in any dispute."
Generally speaking, I don't care for the "yes or no, no elaboration" line of questioning, either; if you know nothing else about me, I think it's pretty clear I like to expand on an answer. But frankly, it seemed like it was the only way to get you annoyed enough to FINALLY verbalize what you have above. And like it or not, answering the questions I put to you as you did should dispel allegations or insinuations that you would use a dysplastic dog as a breeding animal--so really, I helped YOU out...but you don't have to thank me.

Seriously, though, I do appreciate that you responded despite your displeasure at having questions that were somewhat closed-end asked. I dispute your comparison of them to the 'Did you stop beating your wife' type of question, however, because I worked hard to make sure these questions were NOT constructed in such a way that regardless of whether you answered yes or no, the result was still the same. And I also disagree your rebuke of arrogance on my part--I was just seeking to piss you off enough that you'd stop creating openings big enough to drive a semi through if someone wanted to spin your replies to suit their lack of integrity.

by aaykay on 02 December 2012 - 06:12
I am curious as to why OFA does not post the scan of the actual X-ray beside their rating, so that their conclusions can have a solid documentation, right where they have posted their results ?
If they are destroying their x-rays after coming up with their conclusion (good or bad), then one could argue that they don't have the guts to have their conclusions up for external scrutiny/challenges, which in turn diminishes OFA in my eyes, even further.
What is their justification in destroying the X-rays (if that is what they do) that can make or break a dog, once they have come up with their conclusions ? Anyone know ? Certainly it cannot be anything technical, since digital scan and storage are as cheap as chips now.....so that else can be their reason ?
If they are destroying their x-rays after coming up with their conclusion (good or bad), then one could argue that they don't have the guts to have their conclusions up for external scrutiny/challenges, which in turn diminishes OFA in my eyes, even further.
What is their justification in destroying the X-rays (if that is what they do) that can make or break a dog, once they have come up with their conclusions ? Anyone know ? Certainly it cannot be anything technical, since digital scan and storage are as cheap as chips now.....so that else can be their reason ?
by hexe on 02 December 2012 - 07:12
aaykay, I don't know the answer to your question. Prior to the ability to digitize films, I'm sure storage space was an issue, and I know that one can have their films returned to them if they include the postage cost when the films are sent in, so in that regard, they wouldn't have been able to keep everyone's films anyway. But even digitized--do you really think they ought to store every single x-ray submitted to them? If so, for how long? Even digitized, there's still space limitations to factor in... And if they're keeping x-rays of hips and elbows, what about the materials for the other testing they dog [if you look at the listing on their site, they do a lot of different types of certifications]? I'd really rather not have a non-profit organization waste a lot of money on storage facilities unless necessary...
I'd suggest you send them an email, or call them, and ask them your question.
I just don't see the point of asking questions here, where you're not going to get anything but speculation, when you can--and SHOULD--be asking the organization itself. This very thread started based on an allegation, speculations and insinuations, and frankly, one of the primaries in the original allegations didn't help much because he wouldn't just speak plainly when questions were initially asked of him [no, you're not obligated to anyone here, Hans, that's quite true, but it harms no one else if you left it open to speculation whether you'd use a dog that was found to be dysplastic as a breeding animal]. This thread didn't need to go 15 pages to get to the answer: no, he would not use a dog that had been found to be dysplastic for breeding; that could have been said on page 1. But it did grow into a good discussion, there's no question of that.
I'd suggest you send them an email, or call them, and ask them your question.
I just don't see the point of asking questions here, where you're not going to get anything but speculation, when you can--and SHOULD--be asking the organization itself. This very thread started based on an allegation, speculations and insinuations, and frankly, one of the primaries in the original allegations didn't help much because he wouldn't just speak plainly when questions were initially asked of him [no, you're not obligated to anyone here, Hans, that's quite true, but it harms no one else if you left it open to speculation whether you'd use a dog that was found to be dysplastic as a breeding animal]. This thread didn't need to go 15 pages to get to the answer: no, he would not use a dog that had been found to be dysplastic for breeding; that could have been said on page 1. But it did grow into a good discussion, there's no question of that.
by Blitzen on 02 December 2012 - 12:12
I emailed OFA on Friday asking if they archive xrays and for how long. Most I know pay to get theirs back. They may save them on disks, but since hip xrays are essentially a dime a dozen, I'm not sure why they would unless there were something unique about them. If an owner questions a rating, they are going to ask that the xray be taken again anyway.
What does the SV do with xrays? They too must have a load of them too.
What does the SV do with xrays? They too must have a load of them too.

by guddu on 02 December 2012 - 13:12
thanks Hans...very few breeders would have responded. In a way you have outlined your x-ray/breeding philosophy for all to see. and thanks to hexe for journalistic excellence

Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top